RE: Atheism and the existence of peanut butter
November 1, 2021 at 11:21 pm
(This post was last modified: November 1, 2021 at 11:26 pm by R00tKiT.)
(November 1, 2021 at 11:07 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: No, I can't say the same thing about anything. There are things that do suggest or imply other things. I noted that nothing about the nature of causality or the validity of the concept suggests or implies anything about a god...explicitly and specifically.
Can't believe I am reading this.... does the first premise of the cosmological argument ring any bells ....? Aquinas's second way ..stil nothing? What are you doing to these huge chunks of literature lengthily discussing efficient causes and causal chains....... ? needless to say that causality is fundamental in many traditional arguments for God's existence.
It seems you're looking for some short proof for a God. If the only thing you accept as proof of a deity is A implies B without some intermediary steps, lemmas, corollaries, etc. then you might be disappointed.
(November 1, 2021 at 11:09 pm)Jehanne Wrote: You did not answer my question. Not all of the U235 atoms in Little Boy participated in the atomic explosion (a very rapid and very violent conversion of rest mass energy to kinetic energy, hence, the hypersonic blast wave); most of the U235 atoms "survived" the blast. Did God decide which U235 atoms would be part of the chain reaction and which would not?
God dictated the natural laws responsible for the chain reaction, so yes, he indirectly decided which atoms would participate in the reaction. But before you continue, you really should take free will into account.